Time: 3:15 p.m.
Place: Hulman Memorial Student Union 307
Present: Chairperson S. Lamb, Vice Chair B. Evans, Secretary C. Hoffman
S. Davis, B. Frank, A. Halpern, J. Hughes, M. Miller, T. Mulkey
Ex-Officio: Assoc. VP R. English
Guests: Program Prioritization Committee members: B. Balch, S. Berta, H. Hudson,
Marcia Miller, C. McLaren, M. Murphy, T. Sauer, K. Schmid
I. Administrative Report none
II. Chair Report S. Lamb:
I am pleased that the administration heard the hue and cry concerning two issues:
1) The Study Abroad Program will not be moved back under the International Affairs Center. The Executive Committee, the Arts and Sciences Chairs Council, as well as scores of others throughout the University, had serious misgivings concerning that move. Study Abroad will remain positioned as it is, with the Coordinator, Janis Halpern, continuing to run an effective office. I thank the Provost for receiving the input and reconsidering that issue.
2) The one time payment to temporary full-time faculty will be made. It would have been immoral not to include these loyal people in this disbursement of funds. I thank the Provost for rethinking that issue.
I am still quite saddened, however, by the following situation: Six full-time temporary faculty in the
English department, who have been with that department for 6 to 20 years, were given "Lecturer"
appointments this semester in order that they could be reduced to six-month contracts. All were still
teaching full time loads. It is my understanding that all are expected to be rehired full time for the
Spring 07 semester. In other words, the expectation was that they would serve full time for the full
year. The chair, however, was not given the necessary budget in Fall 07 to immediately grant full-
time, full-year contracts. He felt he was being prudent by not committing funds he had not been
allocated. He was going to make the "need case" strongly to the Dean. Of course, the temporary
full-time faculty, who had been serving the department loyally for up to 20 years, were hurt that they
were cut to six-month employees, but said little. Now they are further penalized by not being given
the one-time payment even though they will be renewed. [sl1] This is not at all just. I appeal to the
Provost to reconsider this situation.
Under new business, I would like the Executive Committee to consider a charge to FEBC to investigate the possibility of expanding the role they play in giving input to the determination of raises for faculty.
Also, under new business, B. Frank will be presenting a charge for possible FEBC consideration concerning pay increments.
EC # 10, 11/14/06
III. Fifteen Minute Open Discussion
1) Welcome Center Cost ? (unanswered question from prior meetings)
Provost not present no further information available
Noted: The new facilities are not extravagant, are inviting, and should appeal to visitors.
2) One-time payment for non-tenure-track faculty:
-- Because of budget constraints, former "Instructors" teaching full time in the English and Math
departments were rehired this year as "Lecturers" and are excluded from the one-time payment.
-- Dean Sauer: Is aware of the situation, is concerned, and will be discussing it with the Provost.
Noted: 40% of undergraduate SCHs are produced by non-tenure-track teaching staff.
3) Director of Affirmative Action search progress?
-- No new information.
4) Science Building: safety and security of reptiles continue to be issues.
IV. Approval of the Minutes Minutes #9 (Nov. 7) APPROVED (Mulkey, Evans 9-0-0)
V. Program Prioritization Update
M. Murphy briefly outlined the work of the Task Force, noting:
-- Task Force members saw a "tremendous commitment of faculty" and very much appreciated
input from the deans.
-- The "Mission" of the institution is not clear because criteria are not explicit.
We have, however, been "coming together" for evaluation of programs.
-- In a "competitive environment," ISU is falling behind in meeting demand and trimming programs.
Other institutions are clarifying and implementing their "missions" in the context of current
restrictions and challenges. We must compete effectively. CAAC must be more than a
-- Curriculum review typically occurs at the beginning of programs, but on-going review often is
not effectively done.
-- What is the role of, and how effective has been, our administrative leadership? Program Review
has become more rigorous (outside consultants, etc.), but no apparent changes have resulted.
-- The administration has the "power of the purse." Over time, funding (or lack thereof) for programs
and faculty replacement define a de facto "vision" or "mission."
-- We appear to be "marketing" without a clear mission or any forward planning.
The Exec. Committee suggests that CAAC form a subcommittee devoted to comprehensive
forward planning in curriculum, which would be in keeping with the Handbook statement of
-- Although the Strategic Plan does contain a mission statement, that statement is too broad.
CAAC could properly play a significant role in refining a mission statement for consideration
by the Faculty Senate.
Murphy: Faculty should be the leaders.
Comprehensive planning within faculty groups is necessary to make ISU competitive.
EC # 10, 11/14/06
Program Prioritization Update - continued
Noted: Recent attempts to prioritize/restructure in Arts and Sciences have, so far, not worked out well.
-- What is the proper balance between graduate and undergraduate programs?
-- What if the required $2M in savings does not materialize? Is there flexibility?
-- All programs are not equally costly. Cost/benefit analyses by program would be helpful.
-- General Education: Courses are underscribed. Solutions? (fewer sections? higher limits?)
-- Information Technology requirement: 30 different courses satisfy. Can this number be reduced?
1) CAAC and Grad. Council will forward to the Senate a list of programs for elimination. Only those on
which there is agreement will be included.
Individual deans and chairs will later address programs on which disagreement exists.
2) The Board of Trustees will next receive recommendations for elimination of only those programs on
which CAAC/Grad. Council and the Senate have agreed.
3) Remaining programs will require further investigation.
Full implementation of prioritization will take 2-3 years.
Executive Committee members expressed appreciation for the work of the Prioritization Task Force.
VI. Old Business none
VII. New Business
The Committee approved a charge to FEBC to investigate means to accomplish greater faculty participation in budget matters and in the setting of faculty salaries. (Halpern, Hoffman 9-0-0):
In light of these statements [AAUP statements on faculty involvement in budget and salary matters],
FEBC is encouraged to set up a subcommittee of knowledgeable faculty whose sole function is to become
acquainted with the budget and the budget process, working with the administration to make
recommendations through FEBC concerning both short-run and long-run salary issues. It may be
advantageous to draw on the expertise contained from AAUP members with their access to national data.
The Committee approved a charge to FEBC to investigate base pay adjustments to promotion increments and salary floors. (Davis, Frank 8-1-0):
Explore whether promotion increments in base pay should be raised. Consider whether faculty are
leaving ISU because promotion won't bring the financial reward that a move to another university
would. Comparisons with peer institutions would be appropriate. Suggest dollar values for each
increment. Also, make recommendations concerning floor levels in light of your recommendations
concerning promotion increments.
The Committee approved a charge to the Graduate Council to investigate changes in funding for graduate students. (Hughes, Mulkey 6-2-1).
The meeting adjourned at 5:03 p.m. (Halpern, Hoffman 9-0-0)
C. Hoffman, Secretary